Journal of a Living Lady #158
Nancy White Kelly
Spring has sprung and nobody is happier about that than I am. There is just something about the buds bursting forth and the birds singing to brighten my spirits.
Wish I had a clothesline to hang freshly washed sheets outside. We had one once, but Buddy nearly decapitated himself one day while cutting the grass on the riding lawn mower.
Used to be that folks always hung their clothes out, chatting over the white picket fence with neighbors. Yet, clothes on the wash line told their own stories. Cloth diapers meant there was new an infant in the household. Fancy tablecloths and monogrammed napkins blowing in the wind meant company was coming. Lots of sheets, pajamas and towels thrown quickly on the line usually meant there was illness inside.
Sometimes things of interest appear, not on the clothesline, but under it. I will never look at a clothesline the same again after reading about the Australopithecus spiff-arino.
The story behind the letter below is that there is this batty guy in Newport, RI, who digs objects from his backyard and sends it to the Smithsonian Institute. He carefully labels them with scientific names, insisting that they are actual archaeological finds. This guy really exists and does this in his spare time! Here's an exact response from the Smithsonian Institution. Don’t ask how I obtained it. We journalists have a protected source called the Twenty-first Century Clothesline.
Smithsonian Institute
207 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20078
Dear Mr. Wilson:
Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labeled"93211-D,
layer seven, next to the clothesline post...Hominid skull." We have given
this specimen a careful and detailed examination, and regret to inform you that
we disagree with your theory that it represents conclusive proof of the
presence of Early Man in Charleston County two million years ago. Rather, it
appears that what you have found is the head of a Barbie doll, of the variety
that one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be "Malibu
Barbie." It is evident that you have given a great deal of thought to the
analysis of this specimen, and you may be quite certain that those of us who
are familiar with your prior work in the field were loath to come to contradiction
with your findings. However, we do feel that there are a number of physical
attributes of the specimen, which might have tipped you off to its modern
origin:
--The material is molded plastic. Ancient hominid remains are typically
fossilized bone.
--The cranial capacity of the specimen is approximately 9 cubic centimeters,
well below the threshold of even the earliest identified proto-homonids.
--The dentition pattern evident on the skull is more consistent with the common
domesticated dog than it is with the ravenous man-eating Pliocene clams you
speculate roamed the wetlands during that time. This latter finding is
certainly one of the most intriguing hypotheses you have submitted in your
history with this institution, but the evidence seems to weigh rather heavily
against it. Without going into too much detail, let us say that:
--The specimen looks like the head of a Barbie doll that a dog has chewed on
--Clams don't have teeth.
It is with feelings tinged with melancholy that we must deny your request to
have the specimen carbon-dated. This is partially due to the heavy load our lab
must bear in its normal operation, and partly due to carbon dating's notorious
inaccuracy in fossils of recent geologic record. To the best of our knowledge,
no Barbie dolls were produced prior to 1956 AD, and carbon - dating is likely
to produce wildly inaccurate results. Sadly, we must also deny your request
that we approach the National Science Foundation Phylogenic department with the
concept of assigning your specimen the scientific name Australopithecus
spiff-arino. Speaking personally, I, for one, fought tenaciously for the
acceptance of your proposed taxonomy, but was ultimately voted down because the
species name you selected was hyphenated, and didn't really sound like it might
be Latin. However, we gladly accept your generous donation of this fascinating
specimen to the museum. While it is undoubtedly not a Hominid fossil, it is,
nonetheless, yet another riveting example of the great body of work you seem to
accumulate here so effortlessly. You should know that our Director has reserved
a special shelf in his own office for the display of the specimens you have
previously submitted to the Institution, and the entire staff speculates daily
on what you will happen upon next in your digs at the site you have discovered
in your Newport back yard. We eagerly anticipate your trip to our nation's
capital that you proposed in your last letter, and several of us are pressing
the Director to pay for it. We are particularly interested in hearing you
expand on your theories surrounding the trans-positating fillifitation of
ferrous ions in a structural matrix that makes the excellent juvenile
Tyrannosaurus rex femur you recently discovered take on the deceptive
appearance of a rusty 9-mm Sears Craftsman automotive crescent wrench.
Yours in Science,
Harvey Rowe
Chief Curator-Antiquities
++++++
Yours truly, and smiling, nancyk@alltel.net
